Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Ram Nagina Singh And Others v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 28787 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 11053 (3 July 2007)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).



Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.28787 of 2007

Ram Nagina Singh & Ors.


State of U.P. & Ors.

Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble Rakesh Sharma, J.

This writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

(a) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and quash both the impugned orders of the respondent No.2 dated 18.1.2007 (Annexures No. 1 and 2) and also to quash the impugned Grant dated 13.6.1995, registered on 11.7.1955 (Annexure No.3) executed by the State Government  in favour of Niyamat Khan;

(b) to issue an interim Mandamus staying the operation of the two impugned orders of the respondent no.2 both dated 18.1.2007 (Annexures No. 1 and 2) and restraining the respondents from demolishing the long-standing valuable buildings standing over the land in dispute in any manner whatsoever during the pendency of the present writ petition in this Hon'ble Court.

The facts of this case are very complicated as along with the petition, large number of documents have been filed placing the history of the land in dispute from 1877-78 A.D.  and large number of disputed questions of fact are also involved, i.e. what was the nature of the land; what was the nature of tenancy rights of the persons involved herein up to 1955 A.D. and subsequent thereto; and how the nature of the land was affected after the commencement of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. Earlier, some proceedings had been initiated against the petitioners under the provisions of the U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972. In respect of the same land, several suits had been filed by private persons and State of U.P. also. Certain orders had been passed in those suits.

The petitioners claim that they are in actual physical possession of the land and it could not have been converted into freehold in favour of private respondents. The petition involves two basic questions, namely, (1) what was the nature of the land in dispute, and (2) what was the nature of the rights, if any, of the petitioners in the land.

The issues involved herein are basically disputed questions of fact and cannot be adjudicated upon in writ jurisdiction. Thus, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum.

Shri C.L. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri S.K. Tyagi and the learned Standing Counsel appeared for the respondents.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.